Sociopath Community

AppleGenius said: 

Turncoat said: 

AppleGenius said: 

How do you define consent though?

The capacity for linguistic understanding is a good starting point, following that the means to meta-perspective take over their own timeline. 

Lets say I was traveling somewhere where English is not the native tongue, like Italy. If I can't speak Italian and a bunch of Italians are asking me if I want to fight their local champion in their native tongue, I can't really consent to it over not knowing what I'm agreeing to. If nothing around me is giving me hints as to what's going on, then I have no idea what I am agreeing or disagreeing with. 

Consent requires a sense of awareness over what you're signing up for, and I don't think animals are at the level of signing contracts over themselves any more than children. 

You don't think they would be able to express "no I don't want to fight"?

It would be left ambiguous enough that they could have been groomed or trained into those responses, and with no capacity for language there's limited means of discerning that. With limited means of both comprehension and perspective taking it would be taking advantage of them even moreso than tricking a retarded person. 

We aren't fine with human trafficking and other cruelties towards humans, why should it be okay towards animals? 

Like, if you give them a coconut, they won't be able to understand what it means to consent to eating the coconut, so you can't give it to them? They'll take it from your hand. 

They aren't consenting to anything big picture when they take the coconut, and if you told the animal that taking the coconut means that they belong to you now I don't think that's the deciding factor for them taking it or not. 

AppleGenius said: 

Did it not work out in star trek? I think it did.

They were not able to make a real consensus with The Borg, save for brief periods of time where they have a common goal. They are used as an argument over how establishing Common Ground does not always lead to Diplomacy, they had to straight up brainwash one of their drones to reformat their culture, and even then, only kinda. 

As we see in DS9, many races do not appreciate Humanity even with them offering peace, seeing them as a blight on the galaxy. Very, very often humans even end up the problem, especially if they detach from The Federation or ever experienced War. 

There are numerous arcs where their Federation peace training has to be subverted if not outright ignored. The Federation's higher-than-thou philosophies also tend to rub others the wrong way, in spite of peaceful goals. Section 31 also completely contradicts their image, as do many decisions they end up sanctioning from other captains in spite of still getting them in trouble later for the sake of appearances. 

Klingons, Romulans, Ferengi, Cardassians, Changelings... peace is not the case between all intelligent species. Even their hyper-intelligent humans from genetic engineering were so unwilling to be diplomatic over their believed superiority that they made it illegal to make them. 

If aliens came to Earth should they be allowed to enter MMA, given that they can consent?

What problems do you see with it? 

They actually go into this in DS9 with an episode that shows Vulcans are superior to Humans in Baseball. 

Ill reply to the other stuff later but this bit:

> If aliens came to Earth should they be allowed to enter MMA, given that they can consent?

What problems do you see with it?

I don't see any problems.

Should we be allowed to enter MMA if aliens came here, if by their standard we weren't consenting animals?

AppleGenius said: 

Ill reply to the other stuff later but this bit:

 

> If aliens came to Earth should they be allowed to enter MMA, given that they can consent?

What problems do you see with it?

I don't see any problems.

Should we be allowed to enter MMA if aliens came here, if by their standard we weren't consenting animals?

 In the case of Vulcans, they are 10 times stronger than humans.

Realistically, if ET's came here and demonstrated they are physically superior then wanted to compete. It would be an interplanetary humiliation, and a very unfriendly thing to do.

You say you don't see a problem with thar while the best of us simply wouldn't participate. 

Look at you fuckin nerds 

Admirer said: 

AppleGenius said: 

Ill reply to the other stuff later but this bit:

> If aliens came to Earth should they be allowed to enter MMA, given that they can consent?

What problems do you see with it?

I don't see any problems.

Should we be allowed to enter MMA if aliens came here, if by their standard we weren't consenting animals?

 In the case of Vulcans, they are 10 times stronger than humans.

They basically proved able to hit home runs consistently every time, as the field proportions were made with human strength and skill in mind. It was not just a matter of raw power, they also had the advantage of precision and superior planning. The only area they are arguably challenged in is their creativity, which in something like Baseball wouldn't necessarily hold them back. 

They also made the behavior excusable by tricking the human into having it seem like it was his idea, by pushing Cisko's ego over his irrationally favorite sport. With how much time they built up that baseball he keeps on his desk and the random sports tangents through the lens of a historian, that was a hilarious way to have that bite back at him. 

Lenalee said: 

Look at you fuckin nerds 

Closet nerds are worse. 

It was more than a trick TC. It was personal.

The lead Vulcan was Captain Sisko's bully from the Starfleet academy.

He always belittled Sisko. Challenged him, beat and humiliated him. The Vulcan's ship docked at Deep Space 9, where old colleagues were reunited. The vulcan was still a dick, toying with Sisco's emotions. He challenged Sisko. His crew of vulcans vs. Sisko's crew. 

The vulcan then challenged Sisco to a game of Baseball, which again is personal. Captain Sisko accrpted, then had a tantrum behind closed doors with his woman. 

Sisko requested that she doesn't tell the crew about the personal beef.  But she did. Long story short Sisko's diverse team lost to the vulcans, another win for thr bully. 

Vulcans have to suppress their emotions but in the end team Sisko who was aware of the personal beef, exploited the vulcan bully's emotions by celebrating their loss, and humiliating him.

Star Trek is super old. You guys like it from nostalgia. As a product of it's time, is it actually good for more contemporary viewers?

Admirer said: 

It was more than a trick TC. It was personal.

The lead Vulcan was Captain Sisko's bully from the Starfleet academy.

Oh yeah, I forgot that part. 🤣

He must have understood extra what baseball meant to him. 

Long story short Sisko's diverse team lost to the vulcans, another win for the bully. 

They explained how this was inevitable so many times too, which made him want to win more. 

Vulcans have to suppress their emotions but in the end team Sisko who was aware of the personal beef, exploited the vulcan bully's emotions by celebrating their loss, and humiliating him.

Star Trek in general likes to present a situation someone cannot win to their captain-protagonist to test their mettle. With Kirk he outright cheated, while Sisko was shown to be having more of a battle against his pride. 

Of course the writers had to let them have something, it was a Determinator episode where the good guys lost. What could have been a lesson about knowing your own limitations and looking ahead instead became a tit-for-tat. 

I really like DS9, they weren't afraid to have flaws in their characters be major determining factors. 

AppleGenius said: 

Good said: 

 I picked the symbiosis ending because if you pick the red one, your artificial friend dies too. And friends are uber alles.

How arrogant.